They are for real

Last week I wrote about the NVD Party, founded by paedophiles in support of causes to lower restrictions on paedophilia.

A follow up:
Just reading the discussion in the forum, and someone made a point that is worth noting.
Basically the argument is that among paedophiles ('child-lover' if you break the word down) there are two types:

1) child-lover: one who is attracted to children, who would never do anything that the child does not want and shall not force children to do anything. They listen to the child, and to what he/she does not want and respect this.

2) child-abuser/molester: one who sexually abuses a child to satisfy his/her needs.

Most of the media coverage and public opinion focus on the latter, and lump paedophiles together as one and the same, giving the former group of people a stigma and bad name. There are people who are sexually attracted to children, yes, but they also know the limits of this attracttion and would not do anything to jeopardise the trust and safety of the child.

And then there's the issue of where paedofilia comes from. It is suggested by a member that it is in the genes; that you don't choose to be a paedophile, just as you don't choose to be gay/lesbian/heterosexual etc. Is that the case really?

Perhaps there is more to the story than meets the eye, if only people will open up to different opinions.